Watching Sen. Ted Kennedy go through his usual, predictable, pot calling the kettle black, pontificating on the ideological motivations of anyone not of his own biased liberal persuasion (at present, Pres. George W. Bush's nominee for Surgeon General, James W. Holsinger) is for me a fresh log under the pot of simmering fury I continuously feel at his party's hypocrisy. The controversy currently the target of Kennedy's special brand of upside down ethics concerns an article that Dr. Holsinger wrote in 1991 for the "Committee to Study Homosexuality of the United Methodist Church" that cited various health risks associated with sodomy, and also made the point that, from a purely physical standpoint, the organs involved in such practice lacked the complementarity that nature provided in the male to female interaction.

"This grave misuse of science gravely concerns me," says Mr. Kennedy, "and I need to hear from Dr. Holsinger himself that he will not similarly misuse his position to push his personal ideological beliefs over scientific research."

So, what "misuse" of science is he speaking of. Is it the use of scientific evidence of the increased health risk of anal sex to assert that there is an increased health risk from anal sex? Perhaps it is only because he dared to say that sodomy was unnatural. After all, if it was natural, it wouldn't be so unhealthy to practice, one would logically conclude. I would not have used the "plumbing" analogy to demonstrate the complementarity of the sexes, but to quote the logical Mr. Spock, "Colloquially expressed, but essentially correct." Sexual organs are for reproduction. They are designed for that purpose. If we are only animals, then it is absurd to claim that homosexuality is "natural". If we are more than animals, if we are children of God, then sex has a deeper meaning, a sacramental purpose, and there is even less justification than before for misuse of our reproductive organs. I fall into the latter category, and believe in the sacredness of marital bonds, which sex helps to deepen, as well as for the formation of loving families. However, even without such beliefs, it does not change the facts about the devastating consequences of homosexual conduct to those who practice it, and that cannot help but have an effect on how society deals with the issue.

It is this that concerns the gays who have opposed this outstanding nominee, and Senator Kennedy, who charges, amazingly, that it is Dr. Holsinger (and not the gays) who misuses his position to "push his personal ideological beliefs over scientific fact". And the HIV-Medical Association said they could not support a nominee with "discredited and non-evidence based views on sexuality".

The "discredited and non-evidenced based" views they referred to are any views which tend to shine a light on the reality of homosexuality, whether social, political, psychological, physiological--in this case, specifically that the practice is unnatural and unhealthy. His views are not discredited—there is a division of opinion regarding just how "innate" homosexual tendencies are, and the evidence is simply ignored by ideologues within the medical and psychiatric professions, such is the level of power GLBT ideologues have achieved. Homosexuality was demedicalized as a result of gay activism, and gay activism prevents any challenge from getting a fair hearing. That the gay community is highly motivated to conceal the true nature of lifestyle and practices is apparent by the great public outcry anytime anyone tries to expose the truth. GLAAD (the Gay Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) is there to threaten a lawsuit against anyone influential who may be reckless enough to challenge GLBT orthodoxy, and of course, there are enough well-placed gays and lesbians among the scientific and educational communities to add credence to any such complaint. In fact, though homosexuality only represents about 2.5% of the population, they are heavily overrepresented in government, education, psychiatry and psychology, entertainment and news media, and religion, five areas that have the largest impact on public attitude. This juggernaut of gay propaganda bears the earmarks of totalitarian thought control so common in leftist governments.

"The Office of the Surgeon General has become a morass of shameful political manipulation and distortion of science," says Kennedy. But who is (shamefully) distorting the science? And who is bringing ideology into it? Either anal sex is a health risk or it isn't. The facts show that it is, therefore it is those who wish to suppress the truth who are (shamefully) bringing ideology into it.

I was most distressed to hear Dr. Holsinger backing away from his assertions, since current medical research reveals that life expectancy of gay men is about 20 years less than for heterosexual men, and considerably shorter for lesbian women than heterosexual women as well, and there are a wide variety of health problems and diseases associated with the practice of anal sex, including some that are rare or unknown in the heterosexual population.

What the GLBT community is really concerned about is that people armed with this knowledge will insist (rightly) that it is justification not to promote homosexuality as a valid alternative lifestyle and even to discriminate against them in certain circumstances. And rightly so, for it is not, as many would have us think, like skin color. Homosexual attraction is not necessarily chosen, but behavior is, and behavior has consequences.

This denial of truth and the gay community is not merely to silence "defamation", but to prevent the dissemination of new and existing evidence of the pathological nature of homosexuality, though the longer it is allowed free reign, the more difficult it becomes to hide the truth. People have eyes.

Nevertheless, it is not gay denials, but the denial of truth by public officials like Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, most members of the Democrat Party, and even some Republicans that is most disturbing. Are they really that ignorant, or do they just not care? Worse yet, are they using gay power to promote their own agenda?

The denial of truth is mentally distressing. It's unhealthy for individuals, and it's unhealthy for the nation. It's also counterproductive and unhealthy for homosexuals themselves, who might get help if the nation had not been browbeaten into submission to them. Far from being a phobia of homosexuality, forcing acceptance of a lie is brainwashing. The lie is enforced and reinforced through intimidation. Few dare to stand up to them, and those who do quickly silenced, ostracized, or otherwise brought to heel. Some examples of the denial of truth include:

*Denial of recent episodes of violence and rape against young girls by lesbian gangs (called DTOs meaning "Dykes Taking Over" or GTOs – Gays Taking over, which include some male groups). There are an estimated 150 such female gangs in the Washington D.C. area alone, and have reportedly been going after girls as young as 10. As usual, the story is being denounced by gay activists, but Deputy Beverly Cobb from the Shelby County (Memphis) Gang Unit in Memphis Tennessee where DTO incidents have been reported in at least 10 high schools, told Eyewitness News that GTO gang members "will sodomize [with sex toys] and will force (victims) to do all sexual acts, they are forcing themselves on our young girls in all our schools."

The assaults, she said in an interview, are becoming more frequent and more violent. These DTO gangs, she says, "carry weapons . . . they will use them quicker than any male that I've ever come upon . . . to try and fight them you'll get hurt."

*The denial of the homosexual nature of the overwhelming majority of sex abuse cases in the Catholic Church. Between 80-85% of the cases involved seduction and pederasty of post-pubescent youth. When the case of Fr. John Geoghan, a true pedophile, became known, then many other cases of child sexual abuse began coming to light. Gay organizations were quick to counsel the media to continue to portray these cases as "pedophilia" cases, though in most cases, the facts pointed to homosexual exploitation of post-pubescent youth. An article on the GLAAD website by Gary Wills puts the blame on the Vatican's insistence on celibacy of its priests. Yet, the level of sexual exploitation of children is much higher in the general public than it was in the church, including male on male molestation.

It is a blot of shame on the Church that the cover-up took place for so many years, but given the level of propaganda and militant control of information regarding all things negative about homosexuality that we are seeing in the world at large, and the intimidation tactics used by well-financed gay groups to silence those who would speak out, and given the apparent helplessness of our leadership to combat it, and given the increasing numbers of activists in positions of power ready to destroy anyone who speaks out against it, it becomes easier to understand how this could have happened in the Church under the influence of what became known as the "Lavender Mafia" in the Church. The Church exists in a fishbowl, but the same thing (cover-up) is happening in the outside world, and people need to wake up and realize, the Vatican isn't the problem. It is appalling that the cover-up happened, and I am not making excuses for it, but the Church is not the source of the problem. Priestly celibacy isn't the problem. The problem is the Lie that we are brainwashed or coerced to accept as truth.

It is a shame that Dr. Holsinger has chosen to back pedal on this issue. The truth is there for all to see. It's not ideological. It's just the facts.

Alisa Craddock is a columnist and activist in the culture war, a convert to Catholicism, and describes herself as a Christian Libertarian. She may be contacted atalisa.craddock at hushmail.com.